SALEM — Hostilities over Oregon’s laws for confined animal feeding operations have again flared up in what’s become a perennial legislative debate over so-called “factory farms.”

Familiar arguments for and against stricter limits on CAFOs were heard by the Senate Natural Resources Committee on March 6 during the first public hearing on Senate Bill 85, one of several proposals to increase restrictions this year.

Supporters of stricter CAFO rules claim it’s high time to modernize state laws reflect the growing size and effects of such operations.

Opponents, meanwhile, say the state’s regulations have been sufficiently considered through earlier proposals that failed to pass muster.

Lawmakers have repeatedly concluded that imposing a moratorium on CAFOs isn’t warranted, said Sen. Bill Hansell, R-Athena. “The issue has been discussed for decades, and it’s time to put it to bed.”

Under an amended version of SB 85, state regulators would be prohibited from approving the largest tier of CAFOs, such as those storing wet waste from more than 2,500 dairy cows or 125,000 chickens.

The moratorium would last eight years while studies on the environmental, social and economic impacts of CAFOs are conducted by several state agencies in consultation with Oregon State University.

A task force that examined the controversy after the last legislative session found that large CAFOs are replacing smaller operations, said Sen. Michael Dembrow, D-Portland.

Some county officials are frustrated they cannot regulate CAFOs under the state’s “right to farm” statutes, he said.

“When they’re concentrated in this way, they have real potential impacts on the neighbors,” Dembrow said.

Large CAFOs may rely on the “stock water exemption,” which allows livestock and poultry producers to obtain water for their animals without obtaining a water right permit from state regulators, he said.

In effect, CAFO operators are able to prevail over senior water rights holders by withdrawing significant quantities of water, Dembrow said. “That is not what the stock water exemption was intended for.”

Though SB 85 is the first bill addressing CAFOs to receive a public hearing this year, a similar proposal to limit their size has been introduced in the House. A separate Senate bill would restrict water withdrawals for livestock without a permit under the “stock water exemption.”

Other legislation in both chambers would require state farm regulators to study CAFOs, but the bills could still be “gutted and stuffed” with amendments that expand their scope.

As the regulatory burden on farms keeps mounting, they’ve been forced to get larger to cope with the added costs — and now under SB 85, the government would also limit how big they can get, said Greg Addington, executive director of the Oregon Farm Bureau.

While lawmakers consider whether to ease the development of large tech facilities on farmland, the bill would make it harder for actual farm operations to operate and grow in agricultural zones, Addington said.

Legislation that’s detrimental to large livestock operations would also hurt farm suppliers, such as those selling feed, in turn affecting smaller livestock producers, he said. “We are all part of the same system.”

Existing CAFOs would not be affected by SB 85, which would only apply to new facilities and those planning to expand to the largest tier, said Rep. Zack Hudson, D-Troutdale. “We’re not shutting any of them down.”

The bill would simply “press pause” on the largest CAFOs until new legislation can be passed in 2031 based on the studies completed by OSU and the state’s agriculture, water and environmental agencies, he said.

“All we need is a reprieve while we take the time to do the work,” Hudson said.

Critics of Oregon’s existing laws argue that air emissions from CAFOs aren’t regulated by the state or federal governments, while state water quality regulations have failed to adequately protect groundwater from nitrate infiltration.

Though lawmakers haven’t approved legislation that would halt construction of large CAFOs or subject them to more rigorous permitting in recent years, supporters of SB 85 and the other bills hope their timing has now improved.

Large poultry facilities proposed near Scio have raised the issue’s profile in the Willamette Valley and alarmed local residents, which critics believe has broadened the base of opposition to CAFOs.

Wastewater violations that shut down a major dairy operation in the Boardman area also brought negative attention to CAFOs, as have the bankruptcies and criminal troubles of both its previous and new owners.

Despite those recent controversies, existing CAFO operators say they’ve long operated in Oregon without conflicts with their neighbors or other ill effects.

Meghan Cozart, a farmer in Dayton, Ore., said her family raises more than 2 million chickens a year in the heart of wine country without generating complaints or harming the tourism industry.

“We are not a factory farm. We are not a processing plant,” she said. “We are a family farm contracted to grow an agricultural product.”